Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Savage Wombat" data-source="post: 6388479" data-attributes="member: 1932">I consider this argument much more relevant, thank you.You have a point about where to draw the line.&nbsp; I submit that, in this particular case, no one would have noticed if they'd chosen otherwise.&nbsp; No one was clamoring for the inclusion of fire snakes in the MM.&nbsp; I doubt Shemeska would have complained about misusing this classic planar monster, or that Hussar would say it was forcing setting-specific information into the core.&nbsp; If left out, the fire snake would not have been missed.But by its inclusion (as a juvenile salamander), it brings in the Unfortunate Implication.&nbsp; It reinforces the unpleasant stereotype of D&amp;D as a game where everything is a foe to be slain, and the players as relentless &quot;murderhoboes&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; And maybe you don't care, but if WotC had chosen otherwise, would you have cared either?&nbsp; You don't have any actual vested interest in fire snakes being infants, right?It has been suggested that 4e removed baby dragons from the MM because they were aware of the implications and wished to avoid them.&nbsp; I brought this up in the beginning to express surprise that they made the same mistake for a different monster.&nbsp; I don't feel that WotC should censor D&amp;D to avoid angering MADD moms.&nbsp; But they already leave out potential content that they think would bring a negative image on the hobby - and in this case, no one would have noticed if they had left it out.Thus my comment.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Savage Wombat, post: 6388479, member: 1932"] I consider this argument much more relevant, thank you. You have a point about where to draw the line. I submit that, in this particular case, no one would have noticed if they'd chosen otherwise. No one was clamoring for the inclusion of fire snakes in the MM. I doubt Shemeska would have complained about misusing this classic planar monster, or that Hussar would say it was forcing setting-specific information into the core. If left out, the fire snake would not have been missed. But by its inclusion (as a juvenile salamander), it brings in the Unfortunate Implication. It reinforces the unpleasant stereotype of D&D as a game where everything is a foe to be slain, and the players as relentless "murderhoboes". And maybe you don't care, but if WotC had chosen otherwise, would you have cared either? You don't have any actual vested interest in fire snakes being infants, right? It has been suggested that 4e removed baby dragons from the MM because they were aware of the implications and wished to avoid them. I brought this up in the beginning to express surprise that they made the same mistake for a different monster. I don't feel that WotC should censor D&D to avoid angering MADD moms. But they already leave out potential content that they think would bring a negative image on the hobby - and in this case, no one would have noticed if they had left it out. Thus my comment. [/QUOTE]

Verification